20 ms·

Telegram files EU antitrust complaint against Apple’s App Store

199 points by confiq 6y ago

chmars 6y ago
I’m wondering which legal entity has filed the complaint. Telegram has always been reluctant to provide transparency on its ownership and the legal entities in charge.
- maqp 6y ago
  Regarding transparency, imagine the faces of the journalists who in 2018 went to check Telegram's offices in Dubai and the Aramex employees who share the floor with Telegram said they've never even seen anyone enter Telegram's office spaces. Apparently Telegram's registered in Dubai just to evade taxes. Source? Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1chIByzDhsg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1chIByzDhsg Telegram supposedly doesn't make a profit, but not having to pay corporate taxes also allows them to hide their profits. Where are they working from? How many employees are there? Also given that they had to return their ICO money and pay 18M USD in fines[1], how are they funding the supposedly free app when [2] estimates the running costs of the app are about 200M USD / year? [1] https://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/icos/sec-orders-telegram-to-pay-18m-fine-refunds-1-2-billion-to-investors/ https://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/icos/sec-orde... [2] https://www.businessofapps.com/data/telegram-statistics/ https://www.businessofapps.com/data/telegram-statistics/
  - dijit 6y ago
    if you're serious, then it's because of Pavel Durov's personal wealth. if you're unfamiliar Pavel Durov created VK, which is a 'facebook-like' for Russia, although it's a bit more advanced than facebook, promoting piracy and some other stuff that wouldn't fly in the USA. The Putin administration demanded Durov give access to personal data on the platform, Durov declined, went into self-imposed exile and the state confiscated his company. No VK is owned by the russian government, but Durov still had an enourmous personal wealth, something in the amount of 3 billion USD. He started Telegram in exile from Russia in hopes of eventually making himself famous for being a free speech advocate, then using that fame to make money in other areas. You can see his attempts with the TON blockchain thing and the new gaming platform. Adoption of telegram is failing, and his attempts at using telegram as a platform to gain wealth is also failing.
    - im3w1l 6y ago
      Regardless of his seriousness, I appreciated this background.
    - maqp 6y ago
      " if you're serious, then it's because of Pavel Durov's personal wealth." Any source on the amount? "if you're unfamiliar Pavel Durov created VK" Ah I see, what's the business VK is on? How did Pavel Durov make his money? Did he spy on VK users and display targeted ads like Facebook does? If, is it a good idea to trust him after that? "went into self-imposed exile" He returned to Russia two months later once the (possibly bogus) charges on driving over police officer's foot were dropped. "something in the amount of 3 billion USD." Source? "in hopes of eventually making himself famous for being a free speech advocate" So he set up to create a service that * by default allows the server to see the content of all chats, * that allows the server to always see the content of all group chats, and * that allows the server to always see the content of all Windows/Linux desktop clients. It's OK to be for free speech, but achieving that requires privacy for the activists, and Telegram is anything but. "then using that fame to make money in other areas." Are these business dealings public knowledge? Does Telegram publish anything regarding their business. I'd like to see if the records show that he indeed is not selling user data behind everyone's backs. "his attempts at using telegram as a platform to gain wealth is also failing" My concern is mainly, when there's so much valuable data that gets accumulated daily, what if he changes Telegram's business model once he runs out of money and it's time to cash in.
tigranbs 6y ago
I think giving ability to download apps outside of App Store would break the entire business model that Apple has, because app owners will use other subscription providers and payment options with cheaper fees, but on the other hand there would be a huge problem with Scam apps or cracked versions. So it's not going to happen anyway...
- actuator 6y ago
  I think one of the reasoning Telegram is giving is good though. If protesters in HK are using Telegram to communicate and Apple removes it from the App Store then they have no recourse of installing it. I guess giving a way like in Android where you hide the setting behind a flag in settings and explicitly keep warning the user when they install an app from outside is a decent middle ground. I am not sure of this but I think recent version of either Android/Pixel do a check on apps even installed from outside for malicious activity.
  - amoitnga 6y ago
    I agree. plus, isnt it the case for Mac? you can install apps from other places.
  - threeseed 6y ago
    If Apple allowed sideloading of apps it would mirror the Mac. Where apps are still approved by Apple in order to be signed. And unsigned apps are by default not allowed to be opened. This would not change the situation in HK where China could simply force Apple not to sign the Telegram app and instead sign their fake Telegram app.
    - toyg 6y ago
      You can still run unsigned apps on macOS, either by clicking through pop-ups or (at worst) by disabling Gatekeeper.
      - threeseed 6y ago
ConsiderCrying 6y ago
Joining Spotify and Rakuten. Honestly hope there'll be more to come. The recent situation with Google and Danish record companies being in a stand-off and Google deleting Danish music from YouTube shows how bad things can get if left unchecked.
- tehabe 6y ago
  two different issues. Google is not deleting Danish music, just blocking them in Denmark. Because they don't want to agree on the higher costs for the rights. The topic is rather complex but honestly, I think the issue is not really YouTube but the contracts between musicians and record labels, if those were more fair musicians would earn a lot more, even if YouTube paid less to the record companies. But this rather off-topic.
  - playeren 6y ago
    My understanding of the matter is that while KODA and Google were negotiating, Google insisted their cut be raised with 80% until they reach a new agreement at an unknown date in the future. I would also be wary of letting the other party in a negotiation create strong incentives to never reach a new mutually beneficial agreement.
RomaTesla 6y ago
Through the App Store Apple make sure IOS apps are high quality, which won't be possible if developers start publishing apps all over the place. The fee is too high, that's a fact and that's the problem. The fact that you cannot download apps outside of the App Store is not the problem
- thecreamedcorn 6y ago
  There is no other proprietary operating system platform that makes it nearly impossible for users to get software from third party sources, even apple's their own desktop OS does not restrict the user to an app store or repository. There are plenty of high quality apps "published all over the place" on those platforms. If the claimed benefits of the app store are so apparent then let the consumer decide that. The fee being high would not be a problem if they didn't arbitrarily disallow third party app vendors.
- skrowl 6y ago
  It's worth it to be able to download actual Firefox / Chrome / PPSSPP / PornHub / etc on iOS since Apple bans them for no reason
  - scarface74 6y ago
    So exactly what would a Pornhub app do that you can’t do from the website? Can I buy porn from most mainstream retailers?
    - ToruiDev 6y ago
      It would depend on your definition of porn of course, but at least in Germany you can get pornographic magazines at lots of kiosks/stores, especially the bigger ones
      - scarface74 6y ago
        I’m really trying to be respectful and being careful about the rabbit hole that this question could go down.... But by “porn” do you mean Playboy level nudity or more hard core?
rgovostes 6y ago
Note that the Telegram messaging app is free, with no in-app purchases or premium membership. They are paying Apple only the annual developer program membership. > Telegram said that in 2016 Apple restricted the messaging app from launching a gaming platform on the grounds that it went against App Store rules. Ok, so they wanted to launch their own game store, basically? And what would their business model have been? > In its complaint, Telegram took issue with Apple’s argument that the App Store commission keeps it running. Why do I doubt that they were going to offer their gaming platform at-cost?
- dieortin 6y ago
  You must be unfamiliar with telegram. They were going to offer their gaming platform for free.
  - goblin89 6y ago
    The fact that something is free to you does not mean no one is paying.
    - techntoke 6y ago
      Telegram is also open source.
      - goblin89 6y ago
        I don’t know if you are seeking to counter my point, but open source seems orthogonal to expenses associated with maintaining infrastructure, ongoing development, reviewing massive amounts of UGC and so on.
        techntoke 6y ago
        I was under the impression you were trying to indicate that just because Telegram is free, that it's users are paying one way or another. However, agreed that Telegram does end up paying for backend costs but the app could be modified to utilize a different backend.
Despegar 6y ago
They can file complaints but that's not going to change much. If the EC decides to bring a case against Apple they will have the herculean task of arguing to the courts that Apple is dominant with less than 25% share of the smartphone market. I'm willing to bet it will be a repeat of the EC's state aid case.
- amoitnga 6y ago
  I pay premium for their hardware cause I want to use their software. yet even after I bought it - I somehow dont own it. Im not renting iphone - they have no business telling me which apps to install. market share should be irrelevant in this argument - this is my devise.
  - Discombulator 6y ago
    But when you bought it, you knew of those restrictions, right? A fully unrestricted phone might have cost more (because it is not cross subsidized by App Store profit), so it is unfair to demand full functionality at the subsidized price.
    - toyg 6y ago
      How can you seriously argue that iPhones are "subsidized by AppStore profit", when one division pulls in 40%+ of Apple profits and the other barely 15% (and not even alone - appstore profits get added with iCloud and others under "Services" in Apple reports; realistically, it's probably 10% at best)...? It's iPhones that subsidize everything else, including the AppStore. For all their talk of "going services", Apple is still first and foremost a hardware company.
      - Discombulator 6y ago
        I’m not doubting the facts you mention and the amount of the hypothetical subsidy might be on average in the low two digit dollar range. The overall point is however that the App Store restriction was known at the time of purchase, so demanding to remove it without compensation is unfair. (What would you say if your employer or client demands to pay a bit less after signing a contract with you?)
objclxt 6y ago
> Meanwhile, the expenses required to host and review these apps are in the tens of millions, not billions of dollars. We know that because we at Telegram host and review more public content than the App Store ever will. That’s some hyperbole from Telegram. How big is the App Store engineering and review team? I don’t know, but one report had at least 300 reviewers alone[1]. Add devops, engineering, management...this is easily a team of 500 people, almost certainly more. And then you’ve got to add hardware and opex costs. Does Telegram seriously believe a team of that size costs “tens of millions”? Because I’ve never seen a project of that size and complexity come in at that level. [1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/21/how-apples-app-review-process-for-the-app-store-works.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/21/how-apples-app-review-proces...
- Discombulator 6y ago
  Whatever the true cost is, the argument is spurious: Apple is not forced to provide this service at cost (or with a “reasonable” markup), they can charge in any case what they want. Telegram should rather make a convincing argument why Apple should be considered a monopolist, which is not clear to me given the overall <30% market share of Apple in the phone market.
  - skrowl 6y ago
    100% of apps installed on iOS are through the iOS lockdown walled garden app store. This is monopoly bundling by definition. It' doesn't matter than they're only ~11% marketshare of smartphones sold.
    - threeseed 6y ago
      And how do you reconcile online stores for software businesses e.g. Atlassian, Github, Shopify ? I can't install addons without going through their "app store".
      - thewebcount 6y ago
        Forget about app stores. You probably can't get your branded products into Trader Joe's, but nobody's calling them a monopoly.
veselin 6y ago
It is full of Apple (and other corporate) apologists. But I just want to point out that Google executives were saying some years ago that if Android was not part of Google, it would have been one of hottest startups in the valley. Similarly, I am sure that if PASemi is spun off Apple, it may be the hottest CPU company in the world. I am sure that the Apple services will also do better outside the Apple hardware group. There are plenty of innovations and certainly there is the tendency to use them to raise the prices for consumers (which is illegal) as opposed to grow the market. I will refrain to say if Apple if guilty in this case, just saying that if hypothetically it is, this is not the end. In fact, many good things may happen in the long term by actually applying the anti-monopoly laws and breaking up a few companies instead of working around the laws.
- tonyedgecombe 6y ago
  Except Apple doesn't have a monopoly in any of its markets. They don't have a monopoly in phones, laptops, desktops, tablets, music, TV, processors, none of their products dominate their market. Of course you can try and distort the meaning of monopoly but that isn't going to get you very far.
  - snovv_crash 6y ago
    Unlike the US, Europe doesn't require a monopoly for certain anticompetitive behaviours to be deemed illegal.
    - noarchy 6y ago
      Nor does the US (if we're talking about the strictest definition of "monopoly", which rarely occurs in the private sector), but there are probably degrees of difference in what will set off regulators in the EU versus the US.
  - orwin 6y ago
    Apple Store is not a monopoly, but it is a monopsony and i really don't understand why people defends this. A monopsony is arguably worst than a monopoly.
holmesworcester 6y ago
It's important to remember that the root issue is not Apple's profit margin, it's Apple's refusal to allow users to install the apps they wish to install on phones that they've legally purchased. The margin, if it is indeed very high—and common sense says it must be very high—is just an indicator of how much power this control gets them and what the degree of harm might be.
- holmesworcester 6y ago
  To add to this, we don't even know what the Internet would look like now if half of the U.S. mobile market wasn't subject to Apple control. It's likely that there are amazing apps that never got worked on because of ambiguity about whether Apple would accept them.
  - Shivetya 6y ago
    I had to choose to be part of Apple's market, Apple did not choose me. Seriously all arguments to fall short for that one simple reason. No one forced anyone to buy an Apple product. Now if Apple tried to dictate what software you could use on platforms connected to your Apple product it would be an issue but they don't.
- threeseed 6y ago
  I can't install the apps I wish to install on my Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, Tesla, VW etc. Your argument that "every platform must allow open access" is an unprecedented one that would destroy many business models. Consoles being an obvious one.
  - EdwinLarkin 6y ago
    These are not platform providers Apple and Android are. I would argue that digital app stores should be treated as important and critical infrastructure. There should be a way for you to install (based on a contract) whatever you want from whoever you want. I am all for capitalism but this is a monopolized area and deserves to be regulated.
supernova87a 6y ago
This case is so full of pot calling kettle back, it's amusing. Not to detract from their claim, but cmon, at least use arguments that hold water. "Meanwhile, the expenses required to host and review these apps are in the tens of millions, not billions of dollars." As if the price a company charges for its product has to be tied strictly to the cost it incurs to make that product. Does Telegram follow the same rule in its business dealings? As in so many disputes, the parties will claim this is about principles and yada yada yada, "Apple/Google exercises monopoly control, etc. You can be guaranteed though, it's always just about the price and how the one party doesn't want to pay it, and the other party doesn't want to change it. Simple as that.
daanlo 6y ago
Imho the app store clearly hinders innovation. In a recent project of ours (corona related) we had to wait over 1 month for Apple to approve our app - never knowing whether they would actually approve it. Google Play rejected it, saying it wouldn‘t allow any corona related apps from parties that are not government entities. As a response we ported everything to a web based solution. While I can understand their aim to keep scammers out (probably mainly to avoid PR issues) it was a real inhibitor to our legit project. For future projects I will always build web first. With the app store/ google play you are at the whim of some person at the other end of a textarea.
- Someone 6y ago
  If that’s the whole story, that’s not the strongest of arguments. Google rejected it, Apple ¿approved? it (that isn’t clear to me from your writing), but in your opinion took too long. If Apple did approve it, how does that make Apple bad? AFAIK, you’re ou can’t sue companies for being inefficient. Even if Apple didn’t approve it, the statement “As a response we ported everything to a web based application” seems to imply the amount of “innovation hindering” isn’t that large.
  - daanlo 6y ago
    It doesn‘t make Apple bad. It just means they inhibit innovation. The same way that a micro-managing manager that needs to sign-off on everything stops progress, but that doesn‘t make them a bad person. Your argument of porting everything to the web is absolutely valid. We are a small team though and having to rebuild everything for web meant we had to delay our launch - of course this is on us. Also some of our features don‘t work in web, since the native camera libraries are much better, but they aren‘t available on the web in sufficient quality (neither for ios nor android). And some camera functionalities are generally only available to safari on ios. It looks to me as if this is on apple, but may be a chrome/firefox issue.
Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
What baffles me about people defending Apple is that they are basically saying this: "I like not having a choice. And I want others not having a choice too, whether they like it or not". Users were able to run apps on their Mac directly bypassing AppStore since forever. Why would it suddenly be a dreadful problem if Apple would allow app sideloading on iOS?
- dijit 6y ago
  Unpopular opinion: I see it as a little bit similar the coronavirus masks here. Your choice can potentially impact my security. (or, security of the platform). Personally I like apple devices, I like that when I give them to my family I don't get a bunch of support questions like I do when I give them PC's or my old Android devices. That said: I would prefer apple devices (and thus, their store) to be a minority market share, which pushes the play store to look at their own practices and increase the barrier to entry, or the standard to which applications are held. Even my girlfriend (who is young and relatively tech savvy, though does not work in tech) has downloaded and executed virus' from the play store by mistake.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
    if you don't install sideloaded apps, it won't impact your security in the slightest. Or, maybe, you don't like the idea that you'll have to sideload the app you need because it isn't available in the AppStore? Hmm. Well, you'll feel a biiiiit like other people who don't have a choice under Apple's regime, with only difference that they can't run the app at all, and you can run it in a way that you don't like.
    - dijit 6y ago
      Context of this thread is an alternative application store; Sideloading is still possible and is free, but you have to know what you're doing. It's a tremendous barrier to entry (your keys even expire every few days so you have to keep re-sideloading) thus people don't bother with it.
yannikyeo 6y ago
I believe one can launch an "app-store" like platform, WeChat has done it with its mini apps. But it will get tricky with Apple when you start earning money from your app developers.
- cprecioso 6y ago
  WeChat is the whole OS. The mini apps are the actual apps people want. China runs on them. Apple can’t afford not to have it, so they’re basically allowed to do (almost) anything.
Dahoon 6y ago
The comments here might as well be on reddit or facebook. The amount of people that think they know better then telegram's lawyers if mindbaffeling.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
t0ughcritic 6y ago
This was spot on. Not sure how Tim Crook can state there is no anti trust behaviour.
skc 6y ago
Must be pretty disorienting if you're an EU lawmaker who loves these products and have to make these calls. Apple products are beloved the way sports teams are. Now you have to decide if those products should be tarnished (because that's what Apple would see it as) or not.

199 points by confiq 6y ago

I’m wondering which legal entity has filed the complaint. Telegram has always been reluctant to provide transparency on its ownership and the legal entities in charge.

maqp 6y ago
Regarding transparency, imagine the faces of the journalists who in 2018 went to check Telegram's offices in Dubai and the Aramex employees who share the floor with Telegram said they've never even seen anyone enter Telegram's office spaces. Apparently Telegram's registered in Dubai just to evade taxes. Source? Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1chIByzDhsg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1chIByzDhsg Telegram supposedly doesn't make a profit, but not having to pay corporate taxes also allows them to hide their profits. Where are they working from? How many employees are there? Also given that they had to return their ICO money and pay 18M USD in fines[1], how are they funding the supposedly free app when [2] estimates the running costs of the app are about 200M USD / year? [1] https://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/icos/sec-orders-telegram-to-pay-18m-fine-refunds-1-2-billion-to-investors/ https://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/icos/sec-orde... [2] https://www.businessofapps.com/data/telegram-statistics/ https://www.businessofapps.com/data/telegram-statistics/
- dijit 6y ago
  if you're serious, then it's because of Pavel Durov's personal wealth. if you're unfamiliar Pavel Durov created VK, which is a 'facebook-like' for Russia, although it's a bit more advanced than facebook, promoting piracy and some other stuff that wouldn't fly in the USA. The Putin administration demanded Durov give access to personal data on the platform, Durov declined, went into self-imposed exile and the state confiscated his company. No VK is owned by the russian government, but Durov still had an enourmous personal wealth, something in the amount of 3 billion USD. He started Telegram in exile from Russia in hopes of eventually making himself famous for being a free speech advocate, then using that fame to make money in other areas. You can see his attempts with the TON blockchain thing and the new gaming platform. Adoption of telegram is failing, and his attempts at using telegram as a platform to gain wealth is also failing.
  - im3w1l 6y ago
    Regardless of his seriousness, I appreciated this background.
  - maqp 6y ago
    " if you're serious, then it's because of Pavel Durov's personal wealth." Any source on the amount? "if you're unfamiliar Pavel Durov created VK" Ah I see, what's the business VK is on? How did Pavel Durov make his money? Did he spy on VK users and display targeted ads like Facebook does? If, is it a good idea to trust him after that? "went into self-imposed exile" He returned to Russia two months later once the (possibly bogus) charges on driving over police officer's foot were dropped. "something in the amount of 3 billion USD." Source? "in hopes of eventually making himself famous for being a free speech advocate" So he set up to create a service that * by default allows the server to see the content of all chats, * that allows the server to always see the content of all group chats, and * that allows the server to always see the content of all Windows/Linux desktop clients. It's OK to be for free speech, but achieving that requires privacy for the activists, and Telegram is anything but. "then using that fame to make money in other areas." Are these business dealings public knowledge? Does Telegram publish anything regarding their business. I'd like to see if the records show that he indeed is not selling user data behind everyone's backs. "his attempts at using telegram as a platform to gain wealth is also failing" My concern is mainly, when there's so much valuable data that gets accumulated daily, what if he changes Telegram's business model once he runs out of money and it's time to cash in.

tigranbs 6y ago

I think giving ability to download apps outside of App Store would break the entire business model that Apple has, because app owners will use other subscription providers and payment options with cheaper fees, but on the other hand there would be a huge problem with Scam apps or cracked versions. So it's not going to happen anyway...

actuator 6y ago
I think one of the reasoning Telegram is giving is good though. If protesters in HK are using Telegram to communicate and Apple removes it from the App Store then they have no recourse of installing it. I guess giving a way like in Android where you hide the setting behind a flag in settings and explicitly keep warning the user when they install an app from outside is a decent middle ground. I am not sure of this but I think recent version of either Android/Pixel do a check on apps even installed from outside for malicious activity.
- amoitnga 6y ago
  I agree. plus, isnt it the case for Mac? you can install apps from other places.
- threeseed 6y ago
  If Apple allowed sideloading of apps it would mirror the Mac. Where apps are still approved by Apple in order to be signed. And unsigned apps are by default not allowed to be opened. This would not change the situation in HK where China could simply force Apple not to sign the Telegram app and instead sign their fake Telegram app.
  - toyg 6y ago
    You can still run unsigned apps on macOS, either by clicking through pop-ups or (at worst) by disabling Gatekeeper.
    - threeseed 6y ago

ConsiderCrying 6y ago

Joining Spotify and Rakuten. Honestly hope there'll be more to come. The recent situation with Google and Danish record companies being in a stand-off and Google deleting Danish music from YouTube shows how bad things can get if left unchecked.

tehabe 6y ago
two different issues. Google is not deleting Danish music, just blocking them in Denmark. Because they don't want to agree on the higher costs for the rights. The topic is rather complex but honestly, I think the issue is not really YouTube but the contracts between musicians and record labels, if those were more fair musicians would earn a lot more, even if YouTube paid less to the record companies. But this rather off-topic.
- playeren 6y ago
  My understanding of the matter is that while KODA and Google were negotiating, Google insisted their cut be raised with 80% until they reach a new agreement at an unknown date in the future. I would also be wary of letting the other party in a negotiation create strong incentives to never reach a new mutually beneficial agreement.

RomaTesla 6y ago

Through the App Store Apple make sure IOS apps are high quality, which won't be possible if developers start publishing apps all over the place. The fee is too high, that's a fact and that's the problem. The fact that you cannot download apps outside of the App Store is not the problem

thecreamedcorn 6y ago
There is no other proprietary operating system platform that makes it nearly impossible for users to get software from third party sources, even apple's their own desktop OS does not restrict the user to an app store or repository. There are plenty of high quality apps "published all over the place" on those platforms. If the claimed benefits of the app store are so apparent then let the consumer decide that. The fee being high would not be a problem if they didn't arbitrarily disallow third party app vendors.
skrowl 6y ago
It's worth it to be able to download actual Firefox / Chrome / PPSSPP / PornHub / etc on iOS since Apple bans them for no reason
- scarface74 6y ago
  So exactly what would a Pornhub app do that you can’t do from the website? Can I buy porn from most mainstream retailers?
  - ToruiDev 6y ago
    It would depend on your definition of porn of course, but at least in Germany you can get pornographic magazines at lots of kiosks/stores, especially the bigger ones
    - scarface74 6y ago
      I’m really trying to be respectful and being careful about the rabbit hole that this question could go down.... But by “porn” do you mean Playboy level nudity or more hard core?

rgovostes 6y ago

Note that the Telegram messaging app is free, with no in-app purchases or premium membership. They are paying Apple only the annual developer program membership. > Telegram said that in 2016 Apple restricted the messaging app from launching a gaming platform on the grounds that it went against App Store rules. Ok, so they wanted to launch their own game store, basically? And what would their business model have been? > In its complaint, Telegram took issue with Apple’s argument that the App Store commission keeps it running. Why do I doubt that they were going to offer their gaming platform at-cost?

dieortin 6y ago
You must be unfamiliar with telegram. They were going to offer their gaming platform for free.
- goblin89 6y ago
  The fact that something is free to you does not mean no one is paying.
  - techntoke 6y ago
    Telegram is also open source.
    - goblin89 6y ago
      I don’t know if you are seeking to counter my point, but open source seems orthogonal to expenses associated with maintaining infrastructure, ongoing development, reviewing massive amounts of UGC and so on.
      - techntoke 6y ago
        I was under the impression you were trying to indicate that just because Telegram is free, that it's users are paying one way or another. However, agreed that Telegram does end up paying for backend costs but the app could be modified to utilize a different backend.

Despegar 6y ago

They can file complaints but that's not going to change much. If the EC decides to bring a case against Apple they will have the herculean task of arguing to the courts that Apple is dominant with less than 25% share of the smartphone market. I'm willing to bet it will be a repeat of the EC's state aid case.

amoitnga 6y ago
I pay premium for their hardware cause I want to use their software. yet even after I bought it - I somehow dont own it. Im not renting iphone - they have no business telling me which apps to install. market share should be irrelevant in this argument - this is my devise.
- Discombulator 6y ago
  But when you bought it, you knew of those restrictions, right? A fully unrestricted phone might have cost more (because it is not cross subsidized by App Store profit), so it is unfair to demand full functionality at the subsidized price.
  - toyg 6y ago
    How can you seriously argue that iPhones are "subsidized by AppStore profit", when one division pulls in 40%+ of Apple profits and the other barely 15% (and not even alone - appstore profits get added with iCloud and others under "Services" in Apple reports; realistically, it's probably 10% at best)...? It's iPhones that subsidize everything else, including the AppStore. For all their talk of "going services", Apple is still first and foremost a hardware company.
    - Discombulator 6y ago
      I’m not doubting the facts you mention and the amount of the hypothetical subsidy might be on average in the low two digit dollar range. The overall point is however that the App Store restriction was known at the time of purchase, so demanding to remove it without compensation is unfair. (What would you say if your employer or client demands to pay a bit less after signing a contract with you?)

objclxt 6y ago

> Meanwhile, the expenses required to host and review these apps are in the tens of millions, not billions of dollars. We know that because we at Telegram host and review more public content than the App Store ever will. That’s some hyperbole from Telegram. How big is the App Store engineering and review team? I don’t know, but one report had at least 300 reviewers alone[1]. Add devops, engineering, management...this is easily a team of 500 people, almost certainly more. And then you’ve got to add hardware and opex costs. Does Telegram seriously believe a team of that size costs “tens of millions”? Because I’ve never seen a project of that size and complexity come in at that level. [1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/21/how-apples-app-review-process-for-the-app-store-works.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/21/how-apples-app-review-proces...

Discombulator 6y ago
Whatever the true cost is, the argument is spurious: Apple is not forced to provide this service at cost (or with a “reasonable” markup), they can charge in any case what they want. Telegram should rather make a convincing argument why Apple should be considered a monopolist, which is not clear to me given the overall <30% market share of Apple in the phone market.
- skrowl 6y ago
  100% of apps installed on iOS are through the iOS lockdown walled garden app store. This is monopoly bundling by definition. It' doesn't matter than they're only ~11% marketshare of smartphones sold.
  - threeseed 6y ago
    And how do you reconcile online stores for software businesses e.g. Atlassian, Github, Shopify ? I can't install addons without going through their "app store".
    - thewebcount 6y ago
      Forget about app stores. You probably can't get your branded products into Trader Joe's, but nobody's calling them a monopoly.

veselin 6y ago

It is full of Apple (and other corporate) apologists. But I just want to point out that Google executives were saying some years ago that if Android was not part of Google, it would have been one of hottest startups in the valley. Similarly, I am sure that if PASemi is spun off Apple, it may be the hottest CPU company in the world. I am sure that the Apple services will also do better outside the Apple hardware group. There are plenty of innovations and certainly there is the tendency to use them to raise the prices for consumers (which is illegal) as opposed to grow the market. I will refrain to say if Apple if guilty in this case, just saying that if hypothetically it is, this is not the end. In fact, many good things may happen in the long term by actually applying the anti-monopoly laws and breaking up a few companies instead of working around the laws.

tonyedgecombe 6y ago
Except Apple doesn't have a monopoly in any of its markets. They don't have a monopoly in phones, laptops, desktops, tablets, music, TV, processors, none of their products dominate their market. Of course you can try and distort the meaning of monopoly but that isn't going to get you very far.
- snovv_crash 6y ago
  Unlike the US, Europe doesn't require a monopoly for certain anticompetitive behaviours to be deemed illegal.
  - noarchy 6y ago
    Nor does the US (if we're talking about the strictest definition of "monopoly", which rarely occurs in the private sector), but there are probably degrees of difference in what will set off regulators in the EU versus the US.
- orwin 6y ago
  Apple Store is not a monopoly, but it is a monopsony and i really don't understand why people defends this. A monopsony is arguably worst than a monopoly.

holmesworcester 6y ago

It's important to remember that the root issue is not Apple's profit margin, it's Apple's refusal to allow users to install the apps they wish to install on phones that they've legally purchased. The margin, if it is indeed very high—and common sense says it must be very high—is just an indicator of how much power this control gets them and what the degree of harm might be.

holmesworcester 6y ago
To add to this, we don't even know what the Internet would look like now if half of the U.S. mobile market wasn't subject to Apple control. It's likely that there are amazing apps that never got worked on because of ambiguity about whether Apple would accept them.
- Shivetya 6y ago
  I had to choose to be part of Apple's market, Apple did not choose me. Seriously all arguments to fall short for that one simple reason. No one forced anyone to buy an Apple product. Now if Apple tried to dictate what software you could use on platforms connected to your Apple product it would be an issue but they don't.
threeseed 6y ago
I can't install the apps I wish to install on my Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, Tesla, VW etc. Your argument that "every platform must allow open access" is an unprecedented one that would destroy many business models. Consoles being an obvious one.
- EdwinLarkin 6y ago
  These are not platform providers Apple and Android are. I would argue that digital app stores should be treated as important and critical infrastructure. There should be a way for you to install (based on a contract) whatever you want from whoever you want. I am all for capitalism but this is a monopolized area and deserves to be regulated.

supernova87a 6y ago

This case is so full of pot calling kettle back, it's amusing. Not to detract from their claim, but cmon, at least use arguments that hold water. "Meanwhile, the expenses required to host and review these apps are in the tens of millions, not billions of dollars." As if the price a company charges for its product has to be tied strictly to the cost it incurs to make that product. Does Telegram follow the same rule in its business dealings? As in so many disputes, the parties will claim this is about principles and yada yada yada, "Apple/Google exercises monopoly control, etc. You can be guaranteed though, it's always just about the price and how the one party doesn't want to pay it, and the other party doesn't want to change it. Simple as that.

daanlo 6y ago

Imho the app store clearly hinders innovation. In a recent project of ours (corona related) we had to wait over 1 month for Apple to approve our app - never knowing whether they would actually approve it. Google Play rejected it, saying it wouldn‘t allow any corona related apps from parties that are not government entities. As a response we ported everything to a web based solution. While I can understand their aim to keep scammers out (probably mainly to avoid PR issues) it was a real inhibitor to our legit project. For future projects I will always build web first. With the app store/ google play you are at the whim of some person at the other end of a textarea.

Someone 6y ago
If that’s the whole story, that’s not the strongest of arguments. Google rejected it, Apple ¿approved? it (that isn’t clear to me from your writing), but in your opinion took too long. If Apple did approve it, how does that make Apple bad? AFAIK, you’re ou can’t sue companies for being inefficient. Even if Apple didn’t approve it, the statement “As a response we ported everything to a web based application” seems to imply the amount of “innovation hindering” isn’t that large.
- daanlo 6y ago
  It doesn‘t make Apple bad. It just means they inhibit innovation. The same way that a micro-managing manager that needs to sign-off on everything stops progress, but that doesn‘t make them a bad person. Your argument of porting everything to the web is absolutely valid. We are a small team though and having to rebuild everything for web meant we had to delay our launch - of course this is on us. Also some of our features don‘t work in web, since the native camera libraries are much better, but they aren‘t available on the web in sufficient quality (neither for ios nor android). And some camera functionalities are generally only available to safari on ios. It looks to me as if this is on apple, but may be a chrome/firefox issue.

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago

What baffles me about people defending Apple is that they are basically saying this: "I like not having a choice. And I want others not having a choice too, whether they like it or not". Users were able to run apps on their Mac directly bypassing AppStore since forever. Why would it suddenly be a dreadful problem if Apple would allow app sideloading on iOS?

dijit 6y ago
Unpopular opinion: I see it as a little bit similar the coronavirus masks here. Your choice can potentially impact my security. (or, security of the platform). Personally I like apple devices, I like that when I give them to my family I don't get a bunch of support questions like I do when I give them PC's or my old Android devices. That said: I would prefer apple devices (and thus, their store) to be a minority market share, which pushes the play store to look at their own practices and increase the barrier to entry, or the standard to which applications are held. Even my girlfriend (who is young and relatively tech savvy, though does not work in tech) has downloaded and executed virus' from the play store by mistake.
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  if you don't install sideloaded apps, it won't impact your security in the slightest. Or, maybe, you don't like the idea that you'll have to sideload the app you need because it isn't available in the AppStore? Hmm. Well, you'll feel a biiiiit like other people who don't have a choice under Apple's regime, with only difference that they can't run the app at all, and you can run it in a way that you don't like.
  - dijit 6y ago
    Context of this thread is an alternative application store; Sideloading is still possible and is free, but you have to know what you're doing. It's a tremendous barrier to entry (your keys even expire every few days so you have to keep re-sideloading) thus people don't bother with it.

yannikyeo 6y ago

I believe one can launch an "app-store" like platform, WeChat has done it with its mini apps. But it will get tricky with Apple when you start earning money from your app developers.

cprecioso 6y ago
WeChat is the whole OS. The mini apps are the actual apps people want. China runs on them. Apple can’t afford not to have it, so they’re basically allowed to do (almost) anything.

Dahoon 6y ago

The comments here might as well be on reddit or facebook. The amount of people that think they know better then telegram's lawyers if mindbaffeling.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

t0ughcritic 6y ago

This was spot on. Not sure how Tim Crook can state there is no anti trust behaviour.

skc 6y ago

Must be pretty disorienting if you're an EU lawmaker who loves these products and have to make these calls. Apple products are beloved the way sports teams are. Now you have to decide if those products should be tarnished (because that's what Apple would see it as) or not.